wareagle99 saidlol, Paul. They will close it if there is a real risk........I hope!

I wonder. In 1983 I rode up to Mt. St. Helens with 2 other Army Captains on motorcycles, from Ft. Lewis to the north. The roads around the volcano had recently been reopened.

Well, they shouldn't have been. Sections of pavement had broken away and fallen down ravines. There were few guardrails, despite precipitous drops. We got to an observation area, where we could view the cauldron, still steaming after the eruption. Thousands of acres of flattened and stripped tree trunks lay before us.

So that I'm not sure about the safety considerations. Look after yourself, and assume authorities may not be doing it adequately for you.

actually, mount hood is much more dangerous and you need to be more skilled and go with a group you have trained with.

The risky thing about Mt. St. Helens is possibility or eruption. Don't think there has been a dangerous day since 1980. and even then, they knew it was about to erupt and would not let people go there.

"The USGS said this is to be expected with an active volcano and does not indicate "the volcano is likely to erupt anytime soon."

Most of the mountains/mountain ranges in Washington state are volcanic. I doubt that was the reason for them backing out, as it's a part of life here just as earthquakes are a risk in California, tornadoes in Texas, etc.

"The USGS said this is to be expected with an active volcano and does not indicate "the volcano is likely to erupt anytime soon."

Most of the mountains/mountain ranges in Washington state are volcanic. I doubt that was the reason for them backing out, as it's a part of life here just as earthquakes are a risk in California, tornadoes in Texas, etc.

You forgot to read the very first paragraph:

"(Reuters) - Magma levels are slowly rebuilding inside Mount St. Helens, a volcano in Washington state that erupted in 1980 and killed 57 people, although there was no sign of an impending eruption, U.S. scientists said."

"The USGS said this is to be expected with an active volcano and does not indicate "the volcano is likely to erupt anytime soon."

Most of the mountains/mountain ranges in Washington state are volcanic. I doubt that was the reason for them backing out, as it's a part of life here just as earthquakes are a risk in California, tornadoes in Texas, etc.

LOL, earthquakes happen more often up here in the Pacific NW than just in CA. The whole ring of fire connects all the volcanoes around the Pacific.

The USGS doesn't know shit, the best they can do is guess. Man knows very little about the earth, I wouldn't trust their word over my own observations. But I was born here and knew St Helens when Spirit Lake was a jewel at it's feet.

wareagle99 saidactually, mount hood is much more dangerous and you need to be more skilled and go with a group you have trained with.

The risky thing about Mt. St. Helens is possibility or eruption. Don't think there has been a dangerous day since 1980. and even then, they knew it was about to erupt and would not let people go there.

Kind of...

There have been significant events inside the dome since the 81 eruption, and it has been closed several times, but they really don't know when it will erupt again or much else. All they can do is monitor it.